Autism, exploitation and Capitalism

[FireIceTalon]

I hope they didn't praise running water and electricity either.

Though it certainly can be used for evil.

LOL!

That being said, I've noted quite a few questionable groups that seem to champion autism as a cause. Some include the anti-vaccine crowd (one particular sickening one is "Age of Autism" which seems to contain writings from parents that regret their children's existences as a plague) and Autism Speaks which has posted some rather not so flattering videos publicly concerning the mater. So sometimes, $$$ is in the factors.

I've never heard of Age of Autism but yea, thats just disgusting to put it mildly. The only plague here is capitalism and its neurotypical one-size-fits all only system, that treats us as though we are a burden on society and a threat to profits. That, and the people who promote this crud that autism/aspergers is a disease that makes us sub-human.

Autism Speaks is a pretty deplorable organization as well. It has more or less similar views to Age of Autism, and in the past they advocated the debunked theory that vaccines cause autism (not sure if they still advocate this or not, but it hardly matters now). You can read more about them here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_Spe...troversies

You can even see the views toward us in mainstream media everytime some person goes on a mass killing spree shooting up a school or some other public place. One of the first things many people say is that "he must have been crazy or have some sort of mental instability or autism", or something of that nature. It's disgusting.

[FireIceTalon]

A group that is more in line my views is Aspies for Freedom.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspies_For_Freedom

Overall, they seem to promote the idea of a neurodiverse society and I agree with them that autism is not to be treated as a disease that needs curing. However, I do oppose their view that women shouldn't be allowed prenatal genetic testing for spectrum disorders, since that is a direct violation of women's bodily autonomy.

[Jester]

You sheltered Western liberals understand NOTHING at all about how the world outside of your little bubbles works. The Matrix is very difficult to break out of.

Alas. But one thing that we did inherit from the Athenians, the OG of sheltered Western liberals, was a basic understanding of how to tell the difference between a valid syllogism and an invalid one. Logic works the same for everyone, and a fallacy is a fallacy.

-Jester

(*Some hardcore Marxist schools of thought dispute this, naturellement - a mere tool of the bourgeoisie, this logic nonsense. But then I'm not a Marxist, except of course in your eyes.)

[Ashock]

You sheltered Western liberals understand NOTHING at all about how the world outside of your little bubbles works. The Matrix is very difficult to break out of.

(*Some hardcore Marxist schools of thought dispute this, naturellement - a mere tool of the bourgeoisie, this logic nonsense. But then I'm not a Marxist, except of course in your eyes.)

Yes, in the strictest sense of the word, you are not. However, it is a very short path from where you are politically, to marxism. Even if you don't want it, it'll be forced upon you. Then see how much of your pro-greek democratic pseudo-views you are allowed to spout out.

Just as a sidenote, before this election, I estimated that the way this country was heading, we were about 10 years away from imprisonment for anti-PC speech, maybe even a bit less. This, I believe is already done in a few European countries. From there, the slope is not just slippery, it is no longer a slope. It is a cliff.

[FireIceTalon]

LOL, this is complete comedy.

Ideologically, me and Jester are worlds apart. Perhaps me and him are closer to one another then either of us is to your politics, but that isn't saying much considering how far to the right you are. You are reactionary even by BOURGEOIS standards. You pander to proto-fascist, white nationalist rhetoric, that even most bourgeois moderates, be they on the left or right, cringe at. I bet some of the greatest conservative thinkers of all time, like Locke, Burke, Hamilton, or even someone a bit more contemporary like Barry Goldwater would shudder knowing they had the likes of you in their camp.

It is one thing to support and/or believe that capitalism is the best economic system possible. It is another thing ENTIRELY to be a fascist, neo-Nazi sympathesizer, which is exactly what you are.

As for this country being a few years away from imprisonment for political correctness, that is highly unlikely. Although if anything, we would more likely be imprisoned for being anti-RIGHT WING PC. You know, criticizing capitalism, hierarchy, religion, patriotism and nationalism, etc. Yes, you right-wingers have your own form of PC, and most of it is vomit inducing. The so-called left-wing PC you hate so much is nothing more than a slandering shield you use to try and deflect blame onto those who criticize and attack your deplorable, discriminatory views and tin-foil hat conspiracy theories. You better get used to it buddy, cause we will keep confronting, fighting, and ultimately sweep your archaic ideologies into the shitbin of history where they belong.

[Ashock]

LOL, this is complete comedy.

Ideologically, me and Jester are worlds apart. Perhaps me and him are closer to one another then either of us is to your politics, but that isn't saying much considering how far to the right you are. You are reactionary even by BOURGEOIS standards. You pander to proto-fascist, white nationalist rhetoric, that even most bourgeois moderates, be they on the left or right, cringe at. I bet some of the greatest conservative thinkers of all time, like Locke, Burke, Hamilton, or even someone a bit more contemporary like Barry Goldwater would shudder knowing they had the likes of you in their camp.

It is one thing to support and/or believe that capitalism is the best economic system possible. It is another thing ENTIRELY to be a fascist, neo-Nazi sympathesizer, which is exactly what you are.

As for this country being a few years away from imprisonment for political correctness, that is highly unlikely. Although if anything, we would more likely be imprisoned for being anti-RIGHT WING PC. You know, criticizing capitalism, hierarchy, religion, patriotism and nationalism, etc. Yes, you right-wingers have your own form of PC, and most of it is vomit inducing. The so-called left-wing PC you hate so much is nothing more than a slandering shield you use to try and deflect blame onto those who criticize and attack your deplorable, discriminatory views and tin-foil hat conspiracy theories. You better get used to it buddy, cause we will keep confronting, fighting, and ultimately sweep your archaic ideologies into the shitbin of history where they belong.

So angry, so.....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot

[FireIceTalon]

LOL, this is complete comedy.

Ideologically, me and Jester are worlds apart. Perhaps me and him are closer to one another then either of us is to your politics, but that isn't saying much considering how far to the right you are. You are reactionary even by BOURGEOIS standards. You pander to proto-fascist, white nationalist rhetoric, that even most bourgeois moderates, be they on the left or right, cringe at. I bet some of the greatest conservative thinkers of all time, like Locke, Burke, Hamilton, or even someone a bit more contemporary like Barry Goldwater would shudder knowing they had the likes of you in their camp.

It is one thing to support and/or believe that capitalism is the best economic system possible. It is another thing ENTIRELY to be a fascist, neo-Nazi sympathesizer, which is exactly what you are.

As for this country being a few years away from imprisonment for political correctness, that is highly unlikely. Although if anything, we would more likely be imprisoned for being anti-RIGHT WING PC. You know, criticizing capitalism, hierarchy, religion, patriotism and nationalism, etc. Yes, you right-wingers have your own form of PC, and most of it is vomit inducing. The so-called left-wing PC you hate so much is nothing more than a slandering shield you use to try and deflect blame onto those who criticize and attack your deplorable, discriminatory views and tin-foil hat conspiracy theories. You better get used to it buddy, cause we will keep confronting, fighting, and ultimately sweep your archaic ideologies into the shitbin of history where they belong.

So angry, so.....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot

[kandrathe]

I hope they didn't praise running water and electricity either.

Though it certainly can be used for evil.

That being said, I've noted quite a few questionable groups that seem to champion autism as a cause. Some include the anti-vaccine crowd (one particular sickening one is "Age of Autism" which seems to contain writings from parents that regret their children's existences as a plague) and Autism Speaks which has posted some rather not so flattering videos publicly concerning the mater. So sometimes, $$$ is in the factors.

I'm of the opinion that normal is a bell curve, whereas some are extremely disabled on either extreme. Most are in the middle. Being dead smack in the middle neglects the diversity of the functional extremes. For example, I've learned to ignore, to a great extent, my senses as needed. This gives me long periods of undistacted concentration, where I can emerge hours later from my endeavor ( usually coding something). I then realize all the thirst, hunger and other needs all together. I've heard that certain professions, like EMT, soldier, firefighter, police are best served by people who are like this. Calm in extreme danger.

I'm thinking biologically this was a necessary survival skill for stalking and killing prey.

[LavCat]

I'm thinking biologically this was a necessary survival skill for stalking and killing prey.

Or World of Warcraft.

[kandrathe]

I'm thinking biologically this was a necessary survival skill for stalking and killing prey.

Or World of Warcraft.

... Ya, ya. They make good tanks too. No fear, no bio breaks. Fight! You DEEPS!

[kandrathe]

Just simple logic alone would dictate that anyone who was praised in that monstrosity of a country, would themselves be pretty damn:
A) Evil or
B) Real stupid

Presumably, then, if Lenin said that Erasmus was a great humanistic philosopher, we would then conclude that Erasmus was either evil or real stupid? This is an obvious fallacy.

-Jester

Everything that Lenin said or did, was either evil or a lie.

Let me give you a short list of those that the USSR celebrated, in my time there and before, not couting Russians of course:

1. Marx and Engels
2. Mao before the early 70s
3. Luxenburg
4. Hitler before 1941. Not really celebrated, but admired and respected.
5. Angela Davis
6. Ho Chi Minh
7. Jimmy Carter (no, I'm not joking)
8. Fidel Castro, favorite lapdog of the Politburo.

I'm sure I'm forgetting many, but I did say it will be a short list.

See, the reality is that communism is built on a gigantic lie and propagated through propaganda and indoctrination, especially of the young. This is why it is important to eliminate illiteracy, as reading was the best method to spread the propaganda. I trust absolutely NOTHING that a communist says, because without lies, he has nothing.

I strongly suggest reading Victor Suvorov's "Aquarium" and some of his other, especially autobiographical works. He was a captain or major I believe (been many years since I read them) in the GRU and defected to GB in the late 70s.

My grandfather before he died, told me many things. He was a KGB major.
I KNOW that Suvorov's autobiographic books are factual.

You sheltered Western liberals understand NOTHING at all about how the world outside of your little bubbles works. The Matrix is very difficult to break out of.

Thanks,

I will add it to my reading list...

https://www.amazon.com/Aquarium-Viktor-S...0241115450

I heard of a good one the other day on NPR.

Thank You for Being Late: An Optimist's Guide to Thriving in the Age of Accelerations

Thomas Friedman is a political economist writing a column for the NYT Washington bureau. Still, he's not really a leftist, but more centrist point of view. This book is a look at the intersection of what he see's as the 2007 inflection point of three M's exponential curves. Moore's law, Market (globalization), and Mother nature.

Let me reflect a bit on your premise though, "...anyone who was praised in that monstrosity of a country, would themselves be pretty damn: A) Evil or B) Real stupid ."

I do appreciate your perspective, although due to your personal proximity, and suffering, you probably have acquired some bias. Allow me to propose a reason liberals in the US seem out of touch --> LEFT TURN -- How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind -- Tim Groseclose, UCLA, Ph.D.

But, there is an echo chamber here in the US media. It's extremely hard to find much factual enlightenment among the excess of heat generation in our media.

So, let me tie this all into Autism, and exploitation. I think we can ignore capitalism(or communism), as it is in this case merely the process by which labor is transformed into "output" (or wealth). The original post was (IMHO) incorrectly tying a developmental difference in brain type, to the plight of exploitation of all people. To me, the future ideal condition is where we are rewarded for our free contribution to the society. However, we should not be punished ( by homelessness, and starvation) for being unable to find a meaningful way to participate. In other words, "failure" in our system has life threatening consequences. This requires a clear definition of an egalitarian free market, but one that serves all of society, at least minimally (see my prior suggestion of UBI). The exploitation that I see occurring in all systems is the intentional devaluation of labor (in this case). Capitalists, and communists alike also devalue property in order to exploit them as well. The key being the real understanding of "wealth" valuation, generation and its means of distribution.

In all expressions so far of communist command economies, people are theoretically only paid what they need. The same "wage" as everyone else, but hardly ever "what they are worth". The concept I use for people on the Autism Spectrum is twice exceptional (two sides of the coins). Consider, Christian Andersen at Lundbeck. It is his difference the has found its exceptional use. If only we could be universally concerned with helping everyone find their niche in society without fear of "failure". I believe this is the appeal that communism has for the misinformed. In that, for every worker, their assigned job depending on their ability. But, often regardless of their aspirations.

In our "capitalist" free market, people are paid the minimal wage they negotiate, and also seldom what they are worth. Most enterprises have minimum, and maximum thresholds by "job class". If you are below the minimum for your job class, there is sometimes a catch-up "bonus", often not. If you are "over-paid" according to your job class, you often will hit a wall for advancement in that enterprise, requiring a change of job class, or a renegotiation, usually with a new enterprise. For the "IT" people I've hired and managed in the past, I've kept myself apprised of our local job market rates and kept my employees at or slightly above, because I don't want wage to be the reason for their leaving. One trouble I see is that few of us are very skilled at knowing our own worth, or being able to negotiate effectively for that wage. So, for the "autism spectrum" person, this is also true, but probably no more true than for 90% of other "bad at negotiating" wage earners.

Mostly I see workers in a free market economy, attempt to get employment at the places they wouldn't object to working, then usually accept the first wage offered. Or, they reject the offer and continue looking until they get a better offer or after a few, settle for the lower price. Potentially, a UBI would alter this equation. A person may feel they have the freedom to take more entrepreneurial risks, or reject more offers without the threat of losing their means of sustaining their basic needs. I have met and spoken to many very wealthy people (<1%'ers), and most don't have issues with a fairer distribution of wealth, so long as it comes with free market freedoms, and upholds our egalitarian principles.

[Ashock]

Just simple logic alone would dictate that anyone who was praised in that monstrosity of a country, would themselves be pretty damn:
A) Evil or
B) Real stupid

Presumably, then, if Lenin said that Erasmus was a great humanistic philosopher, we would then conclude that Erasmus was either evil or real stupid? This is an obvious fallacy.

-Jester

Everything that Lenin said or did, was either evil or a lie.

Let me give you a short list of those that the USSR celebrated, in my time there and before, not couting Russians of course:

1. Marx and Engels
2. Mao before the early 70s
3. Luxenburg
4. Hitler before 1941. Not really celebrated, but admired and respected.
5. Angela Davis
6. Ho Chi Minh
7. Jimmy Carter (no, I'm not joking)
8. Fidel Castro, favorite lapdog of the Politburo.

I'm sure I'm forgetting many, but I did say it will be a short list.

See, the reality is that communism is built on a gigantic lie and propagated through propaganda and indoctrination, especially of the young. This is why it is important to eliminate illiteracy, as reading was the best method to spread the propaganda. I trust absolutely NOTHING that a communist says, because without lies, he has nothing.

I strongly suggest reading Victor Suvorov's "Aquarium" and some of his other, especially autobiographical works. He was a captain or major I believe (been many years since I read them) in the GRU and defected to GB in the late 70s.

My grandfather before he died, told me many things. He was a KGB major.
I KNOW that Suvorov's autobiographic books are factual.

You sheltered Western liberals understand NOTHING at all about how the world outside of your little bubbles works. The Matrix is very difficult to break out of.

I do appreciate your perspective, although due to your personal proximity, and suffering, you probably have acquired some bias.

Interestingly enough, I did not suffer. When everyone around you has the same almost nothing, you don't feel poor. I had a good first 12 years. I did not hate the country, I was simply too young to know any better. I celebrated along with my classmates the story of Pavlik Morozov, a boy who gave up his parents to the local police in the 1920s because they were making a little more money than the bare minimum that their collective farm allowed. Evil Kulaks. Hero boy. Such a sad ending... *sigh*. Propaganda is a wonderful thing, ain't it?

It is only after I left and started doing lots of research and talking to my parents and especially grandparents, that I started realizing the full extent of the true evils of communism. Besides, it's not like my elders were about to tell me anything while we still lived there. One slip up in class, or at the park or with a friend, and I'm an orphan (well, in the 70s not strictly an orphan... they would just have been jailed for 15 years, no biggie, like during Lenin or Stalin), so yeah.... they did not tell me anything until we came here.

I do however remember, how when my parents bought me a nice warm "imported" coat from Bulgaria (they had connections in a clothing factory), when I was about 8, they told me that if anyone asks where you got the coat, you tell them "I don't know". This was stressed to me many times.

That is communism. So I'm not biased. I just understand things.

[FireIceTalon]

That is communism.

No, it fucking isn't. Your entire argument (as usual) is a strawman fallacy. What you are arguing against is Stalinism, which has zero to do with communism, or Marxism as a methodological paradigm for that matter. If you hate Stalinism so much, perhaps you should go make your arguments against Stalinists (im sure they will totally give a fuck on what you think, but maybe worth a try). But nowhere in any original Marxist texts is what you are arguing against even mentioned, let alone actually advocated. Your intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds.

So I'm not biased.

Right. Says the apologist for white nationalism who uses Brietbart as his "news" source. Propaganda is indeed a wonderful thing for the people who run that shitheap, since it helps to both create and reinforce a special kind of idiocy much to the delight of our fuher elect. Why don't you take a selfie of you in your white hoodie for all of us to see? At least then, you'd be being honest with both yourself and everyone else here. Your REAL reason for hating leftists (especially those of the revolutionary variety) has nothing to do with you being poor, and everything to do with the fact we wont give you fashies a platform to express your archaic racist, sexist, homophobic, ableist views upon. Indeed, fascists deserve no freedom of speech or tolerance whatsoever under ANY circumstances, and I have no qualms in stating that fact.

I just understand things.

It would seem not.

[kandrathe]

That is communism.

No, it fucking isn't. Your entire argument (as usual) is a strawman fallacy. What you are arguing against is Stalinism, which has zero to do with communism, or Marxism as a methodological paradigm for that matter. If you hate Stalinism so much, perhaps you should go make your arguments against Stalinists (im sure they will totally give a fuck on what you think, but maybe worth a try). But nowhere in any original Marxist texts is what you are arguing against even mentioned, let alone actually advocated. Your intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds.

You know in normal posts people converse... sometimes loudly. It seems though in many of yours, "these go to eleven" ...



Back to Stalinism, yes. However, Stalin's fascist policies were attempting to accelerate the communist revolution through militant class warfare. All three of us can agree that Stalin was an evil dictator. Putin's regime has worked hard to revise Stalin's legacy in order to advance and justify their own hard line policies. But, "zero to do with communism" is also factually false. Stalin was a smart, charismatic student who dropped out from school and drifted into the seedy world of leftist politics. He implemented communism as a thug would, as a means to his own ends. The ideology was merely the narcotic that allowed him to retain power, and justify evil done in the name of a communist revolution.

"In Baku, where he went in 1907 to agitate among the oil workers, he engaged in “hostage taking for ransom, protection rackets, piracy,” as well as the odd political assassination. He moved in and out of prison, showing a special facility for dramatic escapes and adopting a wide range of aliases and disguises."

So I'm not biased.

Right. Says the apologist for white nationalism...

There is no need to engage in the tactic of "name-em and shame-em" here. Your over-the-top false narrative is exactly the type of behavior that you rail against in claiming intellectual dishonesty. It is not the first time you've used your imagination to paint red your targeted enemy. People do know him around here. There are many shades of political thought, not just black and white. How about you give him space to be? You aren't required to be his BFF, or his executioner either.

[kandrathe]

Interestingly enough, I did not suffer. When everyone around you has the same almost nothing, you don't feel poor. I had a good first 12 years. I did not hate the country, I was simply too young to know any better. I celebrated along with my classmates the story of Pavlik Morozov, a boy who gave up his parents to the local police in the 1920s because they were making a little more money than the bare minimum that their collective farm allowed. Evil Kulaks. Hero boy. Such a sad ending... *sigh*. Propaganda is a wonderful thing, ain't it?

A danger, with the reach of global/social media, we are only now beginning to see in the US. I fear random successes by amateurs in disinformation and propaganda are emboldening the masters of the art in manipulating US opinion. I believe Russia, China, and others are now more engaged than ever in manipulating US political thought.

It is only after I left and started doing lots of research and talking to my parents and especially grandparents, that I started realizing the full extent of the true evils of communism. Besides, it's not like my elders were about to tell me anything while we still lived there. One slip up in class, or at the park or with a friend, and I'm an orphan (well, in the 70s not strictly an orphan... they would just have been jailed for 15 years, no biggie, like during Lenin or Stalin), so yeah.... they did not tell me anything until we came here.

I do however remember, how when my parents bought me a nice warm "imported" coat from Bulgaria (they had connections in a clothing factory), when I was about 8, they told me that if anyone asks where you got the coat, you tell them "I don't know". This was stressed to me many times.

That is communism. So I'm not biased. I just understand things.

I understand better now. Forgive me for my ignorance of *real* Russia. My experience has been shaped too much by popular fiction, especially Anton Chekhov.

I've only ever witnessed from my sheltered (also biased) view here in the US, the communism that has existed elsewhere. It is hard to objectively contemplate the ideological fantasy described by its ardent advocates. I didn't mean to imply prejudice on your part. With your first hand experience of being in a communist system, and then leaving it, you are in more of a position to judge than am I.

[FireIceTalon]

It isn't a false narrative though. He already admitted in the presidential thread that he uses Breitbart, a blatantly white nationalist and fascist news source as his source of information. Now, unless he is watching it purely for entertainment or comedy, which I doubt given the language he used when he admitted it and given his past political discourse on here, labeling him a fascist or white supremist is fair game. If one doesn't want to be labeled a fascist or white nationalist, then they shouldn't adhere to or be sympathetic towards said ideologies. You reep what you sow.

Stalin was not a communist, but in fact, a state capitalist dictator. His goal was not to achieve communism, but to make Russia a superpower competitive with the US on a global scale militarily and economically. Yes the CPSU was a communist party, though only in name which doesn't really mean anything. The Nazi's were called the "the National Socialist Party", but we all know their party had nothing to do with socialism in any way. The party was named such to appeal to workers even though the Nazis were vehemently anti-communist. I can sit here and call myself a 3-headed purple alien from outerspace, but that doesn't make it so....you get the idea.

However, while calling him a fascist is tempting, he wasn't a fascist either. Fascism involves an element of corporatism that suppresses labor, often a symbiotic relationship between the state and religion (some exceptions exist though), and almost always elements of systematic racism and sexism, and xenophobia tied into a raging and fervant nationalism. Stalin's regime lacked these characteristics in general, with the exception of strong nationalism (though Soviet nationalism was organized along different lines than nationalism elsewhere). Pinochet though, was a great example of a fascist, along with Mussolini and Hitler ofc. Current Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte could probably also arguably be called a fascist.

It is hard to objectively contemplate the ideological fantasy described by its ardent advocates.

Why?

As I stated before, if the means of production can be owned by a small few, then its opposite, is also possible. Reorganizing the production of resources, goods and services along the rational lines of human consumption and need, rather than for profit, isn't hard to comtemplate, and in fact, is logical. Ah, the beauty of dialectics.

Producing and distributing goods for profit, misallocating resources, with a tiny few people deciding who gets what, is irrational and far from logical if we think about this independently of the context of political economy. In the context of the capitalist system, it is logical, because it is conducive as well as the only logical outcome to its internal framework. But only in that context, and this has the natural consequence of demonstrating capitalism to be a irrational and illogical economic system to base human activity upon.

I think what is more fantasy is thinking that the failing present social order is sustainable without either destruction of the planet, or radical social change taking place.

Ashock did offer one nugget of truth in his post, in that propaganda is a beautiful thing, though he forgot to add that its mostly so for the beneficiaries of the given system. So much so, that thinking about alternative ways of how humans can or should organize themselves are seen as fantasy and shouldn't even be given a second thought. This is an unhealthy if not outright dangerous way of thinking.

[kandrathe]

It isn't a false narrative though. He already admitted in the presidential thread that he uses Breitbart, a blatantly white nationalist and fascist news source as his source of information.

So what? I've looked at Pravda, Al Jazeera, WaPo, NYT, Atlantic, New Republic, Slate, etc. etc. etc. It means I can read. If I take the time the research the author of an article, to ensure that they are the caliber and demeanor of person I would cite, then I'm being thorough and careful.

Now, unless he is watching it purely for entertainment or comedy, which I doubt given the language he used when he admitted it and given his past political discourse on here, labeling him a fascist or white supremacist is fair game. If one doesn't want to be labeled a fascist or white nationalist, then they shouldn't adhere to or be sympathetic towards said ideologies. You reap what you sow.

Calling people names is not how you discuss things in polite society. Basing it loosely on an article he may have read, posted on BB, and which he may have agreed is not the basis for justifying bad behavior. He isn't sowing, and you ain't no grim reaper. Let's just give and get a little respect due to each other. It will be more pleasant. I promise.

Stalin was not a communist, but in fact, a state capitalist dictator. His goal was not to achieve communism, but to make Russia a superpower competitive with the US on a global scale militarily and economically. Yes the CPSU was a communist party, though only in name which doesn't really mean anything. The Nazi's were called the "the National Socialist Party", but we all know their party had nothing to do with socialism in any way. The party was named such to appeal to workers even though the Nazis were vehemently anti-communist. I can sit here and call myself a 3-headed purple alien from outerspace, but that doesn't make it so....you get the idea.

He was a leading figure in the Bolshevik Party, which became the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. We've had the discussion of whether the CPSU is communist, which I think is, and you disagree.

However, while calling him a fascist is tempting, he wasn't a fascist either. Fascism involves an element of corporatism that suppresses labor, often a symbiotic relationship between the state and religion (some exceptions exist though), and almost always elements of systematic racism and sexism, and xenophobia tied into a raging and fervant nationalism. Stalin's regime lacked these characteristics in general, with the exception of strong nationalism (though Soviet nationalism was organized along different lines than nationalism elsewhere). Pinochet though, was a great example of a fascist, along with Mussolini and Hitler ofc. Current Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte could probably also arguably be called a fascist.

I agree he is not a total fascist, just some of his tactics of totalitarian state oppression and ruling by fear are reminiscent. Yes on Duterte.

[FireIceTalon]

Calling people names is not how you discuss things in polite society. Basing it loosely on an article he may have read, posted on BB, and which he may have agreed is not the basis for justifying bad behavior. He isn't sowing, and you ain't no grim reaper. Let's just give and get a little respect due to each other. It will be more pleasant. I promise.

I can have a civil discussion with someone who is pro-capitalist, even if we cannot agree.

But asking me to be nice to a proto-fascist? That is quite a tall order (im partially joking, but partially serious also). I genuinely believe that fascists or their apologists should not have any kind of platform to express their disgusting views of minorities, immigrants, women, LGBTQ, the poor, and disabled persons. Some comrades will disagree with me on that, but that is another matter.

He was a leading figure in the Bolshevik Party, which became the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. We've had the discussion of whether the CPSU is communist, which I think is, and you disagree.

Well, the Bolsheviks being a geniunely communist party just comes down to time and space I think. It's hard to pinpoint an exact final moment obviously, but prior to the 1917 Revolution up until, maybe around 1920ish (or maybe up until Lenin's death, not entirely sure), I would say a reasonable argument that they were a genuine revolutionary workers party could be made. There did come a point where this was no longer the case; when that was is still highly debated.

It isn't really important now though. What I am more concerned with, is the fractured state of the Left at this time, and especially among Marxists. I doubt the Bolshevik party model can be (or even necessarily should be) the sythesis for creating a new international communist program. But I generally dislike sectarianism that plagues many comrades and believe that all Marxists should work with one another whenever possible. I would also like to see them work more with other leftists outside the framework, namely Anarchists. It's probably asking alot though, because regardless of how similar our end goals may be, our paths there have extreme differences.

[Ashock]

That is communism.

No, it fucking isn't. Your entire argument (as usual) is a strawman fallacy. What you are arguing against is Stalinism, which has zero to do with communism, or Marxism as a methodological paradigm for that matter. If you hate Stalinism so much, perhaps you should go make your arguments against Stalinists (im sure they will totally give a fuck on what you think, but maybe worth a try). But nowhere in any original Marxist texts is what you are arguing against even mentioned, let alone actually advocated. Your intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds.

So I'm not biased.

Right. Says the apologist for white nationalism who uses Brietbart as his "news" source. Propaganda is indeed a wonderful thing for the people who run that shitheap, since it helps to both create and reinforce a special kind of idiocy much to the delight of our fuher elect. Why don't you take a selfie of you in your white hoodie for all of us to see? At least then, you'd be being honest with both yourself and everyone else here. Your REAL reason for hating leftists (especially those of the revolutionary variety) has nothing to do with you being poor, and everything to do with the fact we wont give you fashies a platform to express your archaic racist, sexist, homophobic, ableist views upon. Indeed, fascists deserve no freedom of speech or tolerance whatsoever under ANY circumstances, and I have no qualms in stating that fact.

I just understand things.

It would seem not.

Tell me, my foaming tovarisch, what is "white nationalism" in your opinion and why would you think that Breitbart is that type of a publication?

Particulars, please.

---

Interestingly enough, I did not suffer. When everyone around you has the same almost nothing, you don't feel poor. I had a good first 12 years. I did not hate the country, I was simply too young to know any better. I celebrated along with my classmates the story of Pavlik Morozov, a boy who gave up his parents to the local police in the 1920s because they were making a little more money than the bare minimum that their collective farm allowed. Evil Kulaks. Hero boy. Such a sad ending... *sigh*. Propaganda is a wonderful thing, ain't it?

A danger, with the reach of global/social media, we are only now beginning to see in the US. I fear random successes by amateurs in disinformation and propaganda are emboldening the masters of the art in manipulating US opinion. I believe Russia, China, and others are now more engaged than ever in manipulating US political thought.

It is only after I left and started doing lots of research and talking to my parents and especially grandparents, that I started realizing the full extent of the true evils of communism. Besides, it's not like my elders were about to tell me anything while we still lived there. One slip up in class, or at the park or with a friend, and I'm an orphan (well, in the 70s not strictly an orphan... they would just have been jailed for 15 years, no biggie, like during Lenin or Stalin), so yeah.... they did not tell me anything until we came here.

I do however remember, how when my parents bought me a nice warm "imported" coat from Bulgaria (they had connections in a clothing factory), when I was about 8, they told me that if anyone asks where you got the coat, you tell them "I don't know". This was stressed to me many times.

That is communism. So I'm not biased. I just understand things.

I understand better now. Forgive me for my ignorance of *real* Russia. My experience has been shaped too much by popular fiction, especially Anton Chekhov.

I've only ever witnessed from my sheltered (also biased) view here in the US, the communism that has existed elsewhere. It is hard to objectively contemplate the ideological fantasy described by its ardent advocates. I didn't mean to imply prejudice on your part. With your first hand experience of being in a communist system, and then leaving it, you are in more of a position to judge than am I.

Read Aquarium. If this is a topic that you are interested in, it will change your views on the way things were and still are. Plus it's actually a well written, engaging book, although I do not really know if the translation was competent or not.

[LennyLen]

No, it fucking isn't. Your entire argument (as usual) is a strawman fallacy. What you are arguing against is Stalinism, which has zero to do with communism, or Marxism as a methodological paradigm for that matter. If you hate Stalinism so much, perhaps you should go make your arguments against Stalinists (im sure they will totally give a fuck on what you think, but maybe worth a try). But nowhere in any original Marxist texts is what you are arguing against even mentioned, let alone actually advocated. Your intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds.

Let me phrase this in kind so that perhaps you'll understand it. Communism as you think of it will never fucking exist. Anyone deluded enough to believe that humans will ever be able to coexist in such a manner needs to get out of the fucking basement and meet some real life people. Sure there are nice people, and some people who want equality, but there are also a fuck ton of corrupt, selfish, power-hungry, conniving bastards, who sure as shit will never allow your silly dream to become a reality.

Communism + humanity = stalinism.